Att. Women ! Join the United States Army if you like to get raped regularly.

piplin

http://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2013/sep/27/invisible-war-rape-us-military-documentary-video

There's an hour long documentary also on this subject but I can't find the link.
This is pretty damning stuff here. Shameful mongrel bastards and to think this nation is moralising to the rest of the world.

Maximus Alexander

As horrible as that is, are we now doing that thing again where you blame an entire nation for the actions of a few? Cool.

Wacker The Attacker

Lets get these bad guys

piplin

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

As horrible as that is, are we now doing that thing again where you blame an entire nation for the actions of a few? Cool.

If you did that you'de be an idiot. I would advise you to hold your judgement and not ridicule an entire nation just because of a good few bad apples.

dodderangler

'Murica..... Great bunch of w4nkers


Enough of that stupid, bloody meme

Mod

Wacker The Attacker

dodderangler wrote: »

'Murica..... Great bunch of w4nkers

**** may actually relieve the urge to rape their colleagues.

Richard tea

The courts ruled that Rape is an occupational hazard in the army:eek:

Wacker The Attacker

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

As horrible as that is, are we now doing that thing again where you blame an entire nation for the actions of a few? Cool.

Of course. Crass generalisaton is a hallmark of AH. Welcome

Muise...

Yeah, it's the US that's bad, not rapists everywhere. :mad:

Wacker The Attacker

Richard tea wrote: »

The courts ruled that Rape is an occupational hazard in the army:eek:

sure a nice bit of an aul rape is a small price to pay for introducing the world to democracy

It's not just women

JuliusCaesar

There's way too much worship of the troops going on there. My country right or wrong, seems to be the basis of this jingoism.

Not supporting the troops is seen as being anti-patriotic and unAmerican*, rather than seeing the army being tools of the politicians.



*Another phrase that annoys me, being one that's thrown at you for any criticism of US politics. I've never heard anyone call criticising our own politicians as being unIrish. It's probably very typically Irish!

Wacker The Attacker

bluewolf wrote: »

It's not just women

They didnt ask and probably wont tell

The Dom

bluewolf wrote: »

It's not just women

Indeed and the Guardian uses the number of reported sexual assaults implying that they were carried out on women, failing to add that:

10,000 Men Raped in the US Military

The Washington Times reported “The Defense Department estimates 19,000 sexual assaults occur each year, but only 17 percent are ever reported. In 2010 … 8,600 victims [who reported were female, an incredible 4 percent of the women in the military that year], and 10,700 victims were male, reported the Service Woman’s Action Network.”

piplin

Full length documentary here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLPLfkUs1Es

Grayson

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

As horrible as that is, are we now doing that thing again where you blame an entire nation for the actions of a few? Cool.

i think that's ok.

The best line in that video is that the standard you walk past is the standard you accept.

The fact that this so so prevalent in the military and isn't such a huge outrage there speaks volumes.

That video above is in response to a scandal in the Australian Military. The head of the army personally responded to it and approached victims individually to apologise.

The fact is that rape is common in the US in the military and prisons. It's not thought of a a big deal.

Davelarson

How many of these 'rapes' were only reported when female soldiers were called out for sleeping with their superiors for promotions/cushy assignments?

camel jockey

dodderangler wrote: »

'Murica..... Great bunch of w4nkers

The Chinese on the other hand...

Frito

Davelarson wrote: »

How many of these 'rapes' were only reported when female soldiers were called out for sleeping with their superiors for promotions/cushy assignments?

I believe the figure is around seven million.

2 stroke

What right have we to judge the us army? I understand that our gardai are no better, and we can't trust our priests with our children.

clairefontaine

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

There's way too much worship of the troops going on there. My country right or wrong, seems to be the basis of this jingoism.

Not supporting the troops is seen as being anti-patriotic and unAmerican*, rather than seeing the army being tools of the politicians.



*Another phrase that annoys me, being one that's thrown at you for any criticism of US politics. I've never heard anyone call criticising our own politicians as being unIrish. It's probably very typically Irish!

It's a tricky one. I would see the men and women who end up in these nation building missions as pawns in a much larger more sinister picture.

However, nearly everyone knows someone who has served at some point, and you can't exactly insult them either. They put their lives on the line. It's a definite double bind.

We just had Veterans Day here, and living not far from a military base, many of the kids in the elementary school have a parent in the military some of whom are either abroad or have come back from abroad. These kids on Veterans Day bring in their dads photo and and they are honoured. Some of them they don't see that often either.

It's difficult to tell your own child they are a bunch of poor pawns who are being exploited and used and if you sign up for he military you are a moron of the highest order because then your own child will be in a double bind with his or her peers at school, and yet at the same time if you don't say something you are complicit in the brainwashing. Very very tricky.

Americans in general do not hear the grotesque horrors of war in history. I'm aureof they did the feminists wouldn't be so eager to join in with what is the biggest scam going.

These men and women give their lives asking the government only to use the, in absolute necessity and instead are uses as debt collectors for foreign banks.

As for rape in war, what the hell do you expect? It reduces humans down to their ugliest.

Eeden

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

**** may actually relieve the urge to rape their colleagues.

My take would be that rape doesn't have anything to do with sexual desire. It seems to me to be more about exerting power. Otherwise, surely, it would be a lot more common?

Timeless12

Eeden wrote: »

My take would be that rape doesn't have anything to do with sexual desire. It seems to me to be more about exerting power. Otherwise, surely, it would be a lot more common?

That seems like a sweeping generalisation to me. More than likely there are numerous reasons that people rape.

feargale

2 stroke wrote: »

I understand that our gardai are no better.

Source, please.

meoklmrk91

I watched a documentary on this over the summer called The Silent War, it was very good but made for heartbreaking viewing. It left me with a bitter taste in my mouth, in many ways its not the attacks that were the worst it's the way that the victims were treated afterwards, by their superiors, by the forces, by the courts and by the Veterans association. Well worth a watch. Yes there are scumbags in every walk of life, but if the forces treated the victims better afterwards and made it seem like they were on their side then atleast it wouldn't be so bad, as it stands they treat them like dirt.

kerry4sam

2 stroke wrote: »

What right have we to judge the us army? I understand that our gardai are no better, and we can't trust our priests with our children.

feargale wrote: »

Source, please.

Yeah 2 stroke. I'd like a source to see how they belong in this thread on Rape being justified.
Googling those alleged 'Professionals' and you find numerous cases of harassment, some of a sexual nature, some not. Rape would not, would seem to not be common-place. Very close personal relationships exist between superiors and their subordinates, some varying reasons for those close personal relationships, but to suggest that An Garda Siochána belong, or deserve to have their name bandied out in a thread with the wording Raped regularly, is just not justified imo!

I'd also like some sources 2 stroke if you would oblige on our alleged 'Professionals' being no better. It's a blow too low for them imo.

Thanks,
kerry4sam

Overheal

Richard tea wrote: »

The courts ruled that Rape is an occupational hazard in the army:eek:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130515123423AAFiyVn


"No, they didn't. That's the way The Invisible War (TIW) wants you to think of it, and apparently PBS does, as well. But that is NOT what happened. The lawsuit (Cioca v Rumsfeld) was thrown out of court because:

"In the present case, the Plaintiffs sue the Defendants for their alleged failures with regard to oversight and policy setting within the military disciplinary structure. This is precisely the forum in which the Supreme Court has counseled against the exercise of judicial authority. Where the Supreme Court has so strongly advised against judicial involvement, not even the egregious allegations within Plaintiffs’ Complaint will prevent dismissal. See [United States v. Stanley, 483 U.S. 669, 683 (1987)] (“t is irrelevant to a ‘special factors’ analysis whether the laws currently on the books afford [the Plaintiff], or any other particular serviceman, an “adequate” federal remedy for his injuries. The special factor that counsels hesitation is not the fact that Congress has chosen to afford some manner of relief in the particular case, but the fact that congressionally uninvited intrusion into military affairs by the judiciary is inappropriate.”) (internal quotations omitted)."

Or in other words, these are events related to military policy, and should not be dealt with through the judiciary-that's the Supreme Courts' opinion. Take it to Congress, not the courts.

"Occupational Hazard" is never mentioned, despite what TIW and others wants you to think. "Incident to military service" is, however, in the defendant's motion to dismiss (which was upheld).

This is a blog that deals with military justice related issues that discusses this case (and the movie). The last comment in the first link actually brings up why the case was dismissed (and they have a link to the full opinion for the dismissal, as well)
http://www.caaflog.com/2012/07/11/invisi...
http://www.caaflog.com/2012/08/16/the-in...

Edited to add:
"What is wrong with al jazeera?" A lot. I got to watch their broadcasts for 12 hours a day, seven days a week for seven months. There is a definite ideological drive and push to their information (like most other news sources). Not to say they are wrong, but that you need to factor it in and consider the source, so to say. Though in this case, they are actually wrong.

Edited again:
"Rape is an "incident to service." Ah."
No. That's also not what it said. It said the policy problems of dealing with sexual assault are incident to the service, thus a military policy problem, not a legal one, ergo, it can't be dealt with through the courts.

If we want to have an honest discussion about sexual assault in the military (because not everything being discussed is rape-in fact, the term sexual assault in this context covers everything from patting someone on the butt to rape-all bad, but there is a continuum at work here that needs to be accounted for), we need to be honest about the problem. Things like confounding all cases of sexual assault into rape are not useful to that discussion."

Overheal

feargale wrote: »

Source, please.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/suspended-gardai-are-investigated-in-two-separate-rape-cases-226996.html

kerry4sam wrote: »

Yeah 2 stroke. I'd like a source to see how they belong in this thread on Rape being justified.
Googling those alleged 'Professionals' and you find numerous cases of harassment, some of a sexual nature, some not. Rape would not, would seem to not be common-place. Very close personal relationships exist between superiors and their subordinates, some varying reasons for those close personal relationships, but to suggest that An Garda Siochána belong, or deserve to have their name bandied out in a thread with the wording Raped regularly, is just not justified imo!

I'd also like some sources 2 stroke if you would oblige on our alleged 'Professionals' being no better. It's a blow too low for them imo.

Thanks,
kerry4sam

Ironic. You could have easily googled "Gardai Rape" and produced the desired result.


/OT

Victor

One of the important observations regarding the US Military is that it is about 85% male. this mean that stereotypical rapists have fewer women to rape when away from a civilian population.

kerry4sam wrote: »

Yeah 2 stroke. I'd like a source to see how they belong in this thread on Rape being justified.

Note the US Military is 175 times the size of the Garda. The would equate to to 108 sexual assaults per year where a Garda is the victim.

It is difficult to relate the number of sexual assaults that might be committed against members of the Garda and by members of the Garda.

2 stroke is probably point scoring. However, gardaí are not innocents.

https://www.google.ie/search?q=garda+convicted&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&gws_rd=cr&ei=TImFUuDDN4Gp7Ab7tYDgBg and https://www.google.ie/search?q=garda+convicted&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&gws_rd=cr&ei=TImFUuDDN4Gp7Ab7tYDgBg#q=garda+found+guilty&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&spell=1

In the last week or so:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1101/484077-one-charge-dismissed-in-garda-sex-assault-trial/
http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/1108/485528-damien-jermyn-court/
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/garda-who-admitted-using-tax-disk-missing-from-station-has-charges-dismissed-29744752.html